Majorbrough -- space, Minories, and Hornby TT track

[NCB]

How much space does TT scale require?  I took C.J.Freezer's classic design for a cramped inner city commuter terminus, Minories, together with the new Hornby sectional track, to  see how it worked out. I opted for a mainline only rather than commuter terminus, in line with Hornby's current offerings, and named it Majorbrough, situated somewhere in the north east Midlands.

 

I've concentrated on track, rather than scenics or electrics.

[britishcolumbian]

I look forward to seeing some pictures as you progress!

[NCB]

Majorbrough - Plan A

 

 

Here I aimed to get close to CJF's original plan, apart from longer platforms which can comfortably handle 5 typical coaches plus loco.   The station board is 107 cm long; you can shorten it by 8.3 cm by leaving out the right hand half straight in each platform road and still cater for 5 coaches. and shorten it by a further 16.6 cm if you're ok with 4 coaches.  

 

The other board is 115 cm long but could be reduced by 16.6 cm by omitting the 2 straights at the right hand  end. Hornby points and #6 curves do well here.

 

So, as drawn the boards  total 222 cm,  but could be reduced to 180.5 cm with 4  coach trains. Widths are 23 cm minimum.

Edited February 10, 2023 by NCB

[Ravenser]

2 hours ago, NCB said:

 I opted for a mainline only rather than commuter terminus, in line with Hornby's current offerings, and named it Majorbrough, situated somewhere in the north east Midlands.

 

 

 

 

Could it be a sizeable town somewhere north east of Nottingham - served by a line leaving the GC London Extension somewhere north of Nottingham? (Mansfield on steroids , I suppose)

 

A3s were used on the GC from 1936 , so an A3 on a portion of a Marylebone express that divides/combines at Nottingham Victoria is not incredible, and you can have a busy shuttle service to Nottingham and Leicester.

 

The GN can come to the party via the Nottingham /Grantham line (cue Skegness excursions ) and if you want to push the boat out then the Woodhead electrification has happened faster and been extended south to Nottingham and Colwick - trains divide at Nottingham Victoria with the A3 continuing to Majorbrough and an EM2 taking most of the train onto Manchester...

[NCB]

18 hours ago, Ravenser said:

 

 

Could it be a sizeable town somewhere north east of Nottingham - served by a line leaving the GC London Extension somewhere north of Nottingham? (Mansfield on steroids , I suppose)

 

A3s were used on the GC from 1936 , so an A3 on a portion of a Marylebone express that divides/combines at Nottingham Victoria is not incredible, and you can have a busy shuttle service to Nottingham and Leicester.

 

The GN can come to the party via the Nottingham /Grantham line (cue Skegness excursions ) and if you want to push the boat out then the Woodhead electrification has happened faster and been extended south to Nottingham and Colwick - trains divide at Nottingham Victoria with the A3 continuing to Majorbrough and an EM2 taking most of the train onto Manchester...

yep! Was thinking of a joint Midland / GC terminus for handling long distance traffic.

[NCB]

`

Fiddle yard   -  Option 1

 

 

 

 

I've followed CJF's suggestion in  providing a simple  return loop for the off-stage part of the layout, using #3 curves. I've added 4 spurs for locos and a carriage siding  inside the loop.

 

The board is 115 cm long, giving a total layout length as drawn of 337  cm; the minimal 4 coach version would be 296.5 cm.   Width rises to 80 cm for the loop.  

[Ravenser]

2 hours ago, NCB said:

`

Fiddle yard   -  Option 1

 

 

 

 

I've followed CJF's suggestion in  providing a simple  return loop for the off-stage part of the layout, using #3 curves. I've added 4 spurs for locos and a carriage siding  inside the loop.

 

The board is 115 cm long, giving a total layout length as drawn of 337  cm; the minimal 4 coach version would be 296.5 cm.   Width rises to 80 cm for the loop.  

 

How many full length trains can you stand in the loop?

 

The fan of 4 sidings will be a bit limited in terms of train length

[NCB]

12 minutes ago, Ravenser said:

 

How many full length trains can you stand in the loop?

2 if the electronics permit it.

12 minutes ago, Ravenser said:

he

The fan of 4 sidings will be a bit limited in terms of train length

locos; think  A1/A3/A4s lined up.     

[rekoboy]

I would include a kick-back stabling or refuelling siding from the platform at the front of the layout in order to offer more flexibility in operating. As it is the terminus is distinctly reminiscent of the present layout at Ilkley where the terminus is served by EMUs from Leeds and Bradford Forster Square.

[Ravenser]

9 minutes ago, rekoboy said:

I would include a kick-back stabling or refuelling siding from the platform at the front of the layout in order to offer more flexibility in operating. As it is the terminus is distinctly reminiscent of the present layout at Ilkley where the terminus is served by EMUs from Leeds and Bradford Forster Square.

 

I would tend to allocate such a siding as a parcels facility . Set back from the front platform into the parcels depot / shunter to pull the loaded vehicles out and sit on the blocks while the train engine runs down from the FY

[britishcolumbian]

Shouldn't there be some facility to turn a locomotive in the FY?

[Flying Pig]

5 hours ago, britishcolumbian said:

Shouldn't there be some facility to turn a locomotive in the FY?

 

The loop does that job as well as returning the trains on the correct line without using the onstage crossovers.  

[NCB]

18 hours ago, rekoboy said:

I would include a kick-back stabling or refuelling siding from the platform at the front of the layout in order to offer more flexibility in operating. As it is the terminus is distinctly reminiscent of the present layout at Ilkley where the terminus is served by EMUs from Leeds and Bradford Forster Square.

See Plan B... 😉 

[Flying Pig]

3 hours ago, Flying Pig said:

 

The loop does that job as well as returning the trains on the correct line without using the onstage crossovers.  

 

Having said which, I don't think the carriage siding works so well as a siding and I can't see how it could be realistically operated as such. What it does allow is for the station to be shunted while the loop is occupied.  If you need an extra carriage siding, it could be added to the station either alongside the bay or as a middle road.

[JohnR]

I'd like to get another loop in there, to be honest. 

[NCB]

Fiddle yard  -  Option 1 Extension 

 

This allows the fiddle yard to be taken around  the corner to maybe give a more  convenient footprint for the layout, using #3 and #4 curves. It is 55 cm by 55  cm, giving a 277 by 170  cm L shaped layout. 

[NCB]

57 minutes ago, Flying Pig said:

 

Having said which, I don't think the carriage siding works so well as a siding and I can't see how it could be realistically operated as such. What it does allow is for the station to be shunted while the loop is occupied.  If you need an extra carriage siding, it could be added to the station either alongside the bay or as a middle road.

More of a headshunt.

[NCB]

Majorbrough   --  Plan B 

 

 

Plan A is neat, but a bit constrained. Happily it can be expanded at very liittle cost. At the top I've converted the loco spur to an extra platform road; it is departure only, and at times might get  used for  special services  such as  parcels and  sleepers.  There's a carriage siding  added at the bottom and I've suggested a loco servicing facility bottom right.  Length remains 222 cm; width increases to  32 cm.  

[rekoboy]

I think that operating the layout might become a bit tedious after a while - passenger train arrives, waiting loco couples on to the rear end and the train sets off again for the fiddle yard. Or everything is centred on DMUs or EMUs, as at Ilkley. But, of course, any addition  of a run-around facility means a further lengthening or widening of the main board, as does the inclusion of a more meaningful loco facility - the inclusion of a further module between the station and the fiddle yard might be useful, but then space for the layout becomes an issue.

[melmoth]

I think plan B  is a bit over-complicated. For example, to get a loco from the country end of the servicing facility into the departure only platform at the top would require four reversals.  The top platform can only be a departure platform (unless the lines are signalled for bi-directional running) because it can't be accessed directly from the arrival line. I would flip the turnout in the stabling area round and make it into two sidings. I think there's space and that allows more flexibility in getting engines 'off shed' as well as reducing the number of reversals needed to get and engine into any given platform.

 

I'm also not sure about the carriage siding. Because a train can arrive in any one of the three lower platform from the arrival line and leave from them to the departure line (which is, after all, the operational genius of Minories), rolling stock might only need to be shunted to release a loco from the stops, and then the stock might as well be shunted to the next free platform for a departure*. The one platform that definitely needs to have stock shunted into it is the departure platform at the top, but that's at the opposite side of the station to the carriage siding and means drawing the stock across the station throat and off stage before backing into the departure platform.

 

One thing about any Anyrail plan is that I would also suggest using the 'Roadbed' option from the 'Show' menu when planning. It gives a better sense of the width of the track over sleepers, rather than just the track gauge.

 

*If you've managed to fill all four platforms with arrivals and the next move on your timetable/schedule is another arrival, you probably need to have a word with someone in Traffic Control at Divisional HQ

[britishcolumbian]

9 hours ago, Flying Pig said:

 

The loop does that job as well as returning the trains on the correct line without using the onstage crossovers.  

I had to actually use pieces of paper to visualise how that works... but I get it now.

[NCB]

To clarify, the loco parking/servicing area is intended for station shunters only,  mainline locos heading offstage.

 

 

Norm would probably be

 

1. Express arrives, loco detaches      
2. Shunter attaches, pulls coaches to offstage carriage sidings  (headshunt or loop) for servicing
3. Train loco  heads offstage

[NCB]

On 11/02/2023 at 20:16, melmoth said:

I think plan B  is a bit over-complicated. For example, to get a loco from the country end of the servicing facility into the departure only platform at the top would require four reversals.  The top platform can only be a departure platform (unless the lines are signalled for bi-directional running) because it can't be accessed directly from the arrival line. I would flip the turnout in the stabling area round and make it into two sidings. I think there's space and that allows more flexibility in getting engines 'off shed' as well as reducing the number of reversals needed to get and engine into any given platform.

 

I'm also not sure about the carriage siding. Because a train can arrive in any one of the three lower platform from the arrival line and leave from them to the departure line (which is, after all, the operational genius of Minories), rolling stock might only need to be shunted to release a loco from the stops, and then the stock might as well be shunted to the next free platform for a departure*. The one platform that definitely needs to have stock shunted into it is the departure platform at the top, but that's at the opposite side of the station to the carriage siding and means drawing the stock across the station throat and off stage before backing into the departure platform.

 

One thing about any Anyrail plan is that I would also suggest using the 'Roadbed' option from the 'Show' menu when planning. It gives a better sense of the width of the track over sleepers, rather than just the track gauge.

 

*If you've managed to fill all four platforms with arrivals and the next move on your timetable/schedule is another arrival, you probably need to have a word with someone in Traffic Control at Divisional HQ

Reckon adding flexibility is no bad thing; it's up to you  how you use it.

 

 Me, I'd base it in the 1950s, and be influenced  by what Hornby actually produces. A rake or two of mk 1 coaches is a must, but what about parcels, sleepers, excursions?  The  exttra platform and siding could be used for such stuff.
 

[woodenhead]

Something pertinent to note, this railway currently has no turning facility for the locos - does the A3 have a front coupling, the A4 certainly doesn't so you will need to turn locos.

 

If your return loop is to hold trains, it cannot also double as a means to turn the locos, either a turntable or a second return loop is needed.

[Flying Pig]

It's probably worth remembering that CJF drew Minories with a particular kind of operation in mind, which did not include the variety of trains most of us want to operate.  In the original context, a return loop works well as you only need a two or three trains of suburban carriages to represent an intensive service.  Assuming that the loop holds one train, the capacity is at most three trains, leaving either the loop or one platform free at all times to avoid gumming the whole thing up.

 

Trains are continuously moving through the loop rather than being stored there as in the standard fiddle yard.  Carriages stay in the platform until they depart as another train, releasing the loco that brought them in. Locos are tank engines and don't need turning so just go to the loco spur between duties and shunt directly to their next train.  In effect, the station acts as its own fiddle yard and the loop is just a means of returning trains to it with a small delay.

 

With this operational model it is quite possible to use the loop to turn locos, fitting them in between trains. 

 

However, if what is really wanted is a traditional fiddle yard where a variety of trains can be stored for an extended period, then that is probably a better solution than a return loop.